MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593882186 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v6n2p134

On Some Mixture Models for Over-dispersed Binary Data

2017· article· en· W2593882186 on OpenAlex
Bayo Lawal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsApplied mathematicsBinary numberBinomial (polynomial)CovariateQuasi-likelihoodMixture modelComputationBinary dataRange (aeronautics)Count dataStatisticsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider several binomial mixture models for fitting over-dispersed binary data. The models range from the binomial itself, to the beta-binomial (BB), the Kumaraswamy distributions I and II (KPI \& KPII) as well as the McDonald generalized beta-binomial mixed model (McGBB). The models are applied to five data sets that have received attention in various literature. Because of convergence issues, several optimization methods ranging from the Newton-Raphson to the quasi-Newton optimization algorithms were employed with SAS PROC NLMIXED using the Adaptive Gaussian Quadrature as the integral approximation method within PROC NLMIXED. Our results differ from those presented in Li, Huang and Zhao (2011) for the example data sets in that paper but agree with those presented in Manoj, Wijekoon and Yapa (2013). We also applied these models to the case where we have a $k$ vector of covariates $(x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_k)^{'}$. Our results here suggest that the McGBB performs better than the other models in the GLM framework. All computations in this paper employed PROC NLMIXED in SAS. We present in the appendix a sample of the SAS program employed for implementing the McGBB model for one of the examples.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it